"Consensual Relationship, No Intention To Prosecute": Telangana High Court Quashes FIR U/S 69 BNS

The Telangana High Court, in a recent judgement, has quashed criminal proceedings registered under Sections 69 and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), observing that continuation of the case would amount to abuse of process of law where the de facto complainant stated that she did not intend to prosecute the accused and had amicably resolved the dispute.Justice Tirumala Devi Eada was dealing with a Criminal Petition filed by the accused seeking quashing of proceedings in a crime case registered at Zaheerabad Town Police Station, Sangareddy District.As per the complaint, the respondent No.2, aged 28 years and working as a housemaid, was in love with the petitioner. It was alleged that out of acquaintance, they gained intimacy and, believing that he would marry her, she entertained a physical relationship with him. Subsequently, the elders of both families agreed to perform the engagement. However, later, the parents of the petitioner refused to proceed, following which the FIR was registered.The petitioners contended that the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No.2 were in a consensual relationship and that Section 69 of BNS was not attracted. It was further submitted that petitioner No.1 had not attained 21 years of age as on the date of the alleged offence and had not reached the eligible age for marriage.It was submitted by the second respondent that she is an illiterate housemaid and does not understand the intricacies of society or the contents of the FIR. It was stated that she loved petitioner No. 1, but due to cultural differences, the alliance did not proceed. Out of mental stress, she approached the police and expressed her displeasure, but she does not intend to prosecute or punish the petitioners.However, assailing the above submissions, the State submitted that, initially, the complaint contained allegations on which the FIR was registered, and that the present stand may have been taken out of fear that her future marriage prospects may be affected.Later, a Memorandum of Understanding dated 18.09.2025 was entered into between the parties. In the Memorandum, the complainant stated that she approached for the settlement of her own will and wish, that she was getting married as arranged by her family, and that continuation of the case would affect her future marital life. It was further recorded that petitioner No.1 had never promised marriage and that both parties agreed not to interfere in each other's lives.Subsequently, an application to record the compromise was filed before the Court, however, it declined to entertain it in view of the guidelines laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, wherein it was held that inherent powers to quash proceedings for non-compoundable offences based on compromise are not to be exercised in prosecutions involving heinous and serious offences.Nevertheless, while considering the main petition, the Court placed reliance on Madhukar & Ors v The State of Maharashtra, noting that even if the matter proceeded to trial, no purpose would be served if this were to be the evidence of the de facto complainant.“In Madhukar & Ors.v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr., the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that when the parties have amicably resolved their differences and arrived at a mutual understanding, in those circumstances, the continuation of the trial would not serve any meaningful purpose and it would only prolong distress for all concerned, especially the complainant and burden the courts without the likelihood of a productive outcome”, the Court held in its reasoning. In light of the above discussion, the Court opined that continuance of proceedings against the petitioners would amount to an abuse of the process of law.Accordingly, the Criminal Petition was allowed, and the proceedings against the accused were quashed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, were directed to stand closed.Case No. Criminal Petition No. 12373 of 2025Click Here To Read/Download Order

"Consensual Relationship, No Intention To Prosecute": Telangana High Court Quashes FIR U/S 69 BNS

Preet Luthra

Tags